So far i haven't really seen this anywhere. It takes 3 arguments (a, s, :cool.gif: and depending on the state of S returns either A or B. i hope this is useful to someone
[inputs]
S A B O <-- outputs
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0
1 0 1 1
1 1 0 0
1 1 1 1
Edit: oh and i can get the designs to work for me, they are kinda a pain to build but they work
So far i haven't really seen this anywhere. It takes 3 arguments (a, s, :cool.gif: and depending on the state of S returns either A or B. i hope this is useful to someone
...
Problem: If S is high (selecting A) then B comes through anyway, at least with the schematic you've posted. Your truth table does not seem to match.
What you've (mostly) built, by the way, is a 1-bit demultiplexer coupled with two AND gates.
I'm having trouble with the XNOR "E" and "F" designs on the Wiki page:
I've double- and triple-checked it, and I don't know what the problem is.
I can't make F work either, haven't tried E.
Whutchu talkin 'bout?
They both work fine. Remember that a grey block means a block on top of a wire or torch, that's critical.
Oh... I wasn't sure about the grey block, that's for pointing that out :tongue.gif:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Esthin »
The creeper would SSS, but then stop as I held him in my arms. I would look down upon him, and his frown would turn into a beautiful smile.
He would look up at me.. A single tear would come from his eye, and he would say "Thank you".
Problem: If S is high (selecting A) then B comes through anyway, at least with the schematic you've posted. Your truth table does not seem to match.
What you've (mostly) built, by the way, is a 1-bit demultiplexer coupled with two AND gates.
heres a picture:
Also, more info on what a "demultiplexer" is, maybe a use for it?
EDIT: B is returned with S is ON, so B is supposed to come through when S is high, if you want A to come through when S is high, put the torch on the 2nd layer on the other side of the block.
Edit 2: this is a multiplexer according to wiki (most reliable source ever loljk)
What you have is indeed a multiplexer; I'm not sure what I was thinking.
A definitely comes through when S is high (the S block has power going to do it -> torch attached to S is off) according to your schematic. I really can't tell what's going on in the screenshot with your texture pack, but I can tell you that switches behave differently than simply wiring up a block, so if you're using them you need to include that in the schematic. Normally when people indicate inputs on a schematic the blocks are powered by wires or torches, not switches, and this will give you a different result because the switch in your screenshot is also powering the wire on the block next to the one it's attached to.
ah hah, thats why it works for me (the switch), my only problem is i dont know how these particular things work.. and by that i mean.. its still unclear to me exactly how torches distribute power. anyway thanks for the help!
I think a really cool thing to impliment into the game would be a way to create logic gates int he same style that we create tools. Naturally the only this we would really need or NOR and NAND gates since we can make pretty much any other logic gate with this logic gates.
So it would work something like this. Create a redstong work bench. just like a normal work bench then in the grid which would be bigger than 3x3 i would think. We could then create are gates.
= wire(input) = stone = redstone torch = output. = torch on top of stone
[] = blank space = redstone on top of stone
so in the redstone work bench we could make this.
[]
this would then create just one block that would do all that logic for us in a smaller place.
Basically a 1x1 block with inputs coming from the N and S while the output comes on the E.
I know the N and S and E things wouldnt be optimal in most cases but it could obviously be made in a different direction. I dont think this will ever happen but it would make this so much simpler. Basically Minecraft IC's
Also, more info on what a "demultiplexer" is, maybe a use for it?
An example of a use is the “output muxer” in my ALU design, which selects the operation to use. My current design is much bulkier (and slower) than yours.
I've been playing around trying to make a small D-Flip-Flop:
It uses the vertical RS NOR latch from this post. The very rightmost cell (with the ~Q output) can be moved to the asterisk (*) to make it shorter in that direction.
I'm unhappy with how much space the clock lines take up, but it does make it easy to connect a bunch in a line for a shift register. I'd like to find a way to bring in the left side by one more cell.
That's very nifty, I really need to learn the rules for vertical signal propagation. However, I don't think it helps here. You have to run the clock line one cell further out to the left with your design. It also introduces a 1 tick delay on the clock, which is minor but can make synchronizing more of a pain. I do appreciate you looking at it though.
P.S. May I ask what program you used to make that gif?
I've posted some D-latches with a smaller footprint over the past couple pages if you're interested in using those. They're taller than your design but take up less area on the ground.
This isn't exactly related to logic gates but this seems like the best place to ask.
Does anyone know if it's possible to make wide buses like the one above go around corners in a fixed number of ticks? The obvious way of going around a corner makes the lines toward the outer radius much longer than the inner lines, requiring inverters on some lines but not others. This means I need to add extra delay to the inner lines after the corner (which is undesirable) or find a way to fold it over (like a ribbon cable) in a compact space.
Any ideas?
Edit: Of course, right when I post about it I figure it out.
The upper torches transmit to lines above and the lower torches to lines below, then they're put back together.
Edit 2: I just realized this has the same effect as just sticking inverters on a regular corner unless the bus is more than 15 wide in which case you'd need to invert multiple times, but that's not really solved with this either. :/
Edit 3: Good news, the torches aren't necessary for this at all. Now all of the signals arrive at the same time and travel the same distance, so there's no need for staggered/multiple repeaters.
Does anyone know if it's possible to make wide buses like the one above go around corners in a fixed number of ticks? The obvious way of going around a corner makes the lines toward the outer radius much longer than the inner lines, requiring inverters on some lines but not others. This means I need to add extra delay to the inner lines after the corner (which is undesirable) or find a way to fold it over (like a ribbon cable) in a compact space.
Edit 3: Good news, the torches aren't necessary for this at all. Now all of the signals arrive at the same time and travel the same distance, so there's no need for staggered/multiple repeaters.
Is this image missing some layers? The wires seem to not be connected to anything.
I was wondering if someone could help me with a problem I've run into with my locking door.
I have an AND gate made with both inputs each coming from a single lever; one outside (open/close) and one inside (lock/unlock).
The output is connected to my door, but i run into my problem trying to hide the wiring connected to my door. When i put down blocks to complete the floor just inside the door it cuts off the connection to the output of the AND gate.
So, I was wondering if there is any way to make an AND gate with my same inputs that are working, but instead of the output wired straight to the door, if I could lead the output wire to the block underneath my door and transmit up using another red torch.
I've tried to do this and the door is powered by the torch, but the AND circuit doesn't seem to work the way it should this way.
Also, is it true that you can put glass over/on top of the wiring and it will not break the connection?
Whutchu talkin 'bout?
They both work fine. Remember that a grey block means a block on top of a wire or torch, that's critical.
I assure you - I've made both exactly as they appear in the schematic.
Here’s a schematic file. Works fine in game and in simulator.
Imitating greatness: 16-bit Hack ALU design
KEEP CALM AND EAT CAKE
Thanks - I'll check to see why it wasn't working for me
So far i haven't really seen this anywhere. It takes 3 arguments (a, s, :cool.gif: and depending on the state of S returns either A or B. i hope this is useful to someone
[inputs]
S A B O <-- outputs
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0
1 0 1 1
1 1 0 0
1 1 1 1
Edit: oh and i can get the designs to work for me, they are kinda a pain to build but they work
Problem: If S is high (selecting A) then B comes through anyway, at least with the schematic you've posted. Your truth table does not seem to match.
What you've (mostly) built, by the way, is a 1-bit demultiplexer coupled with two AND gates.Oh... I wasn't sure about the grey block, that's for pointing that out :tongue.gif:
heres a picture:
Also, more info on what a "demultiplexer" is, maybe a use for it?
EDIT: B is returned with S is ON, so B is supposed to come through when S is high, if you want A to come through when S is high, put the torch on the 2nd layer on the other side of the block.
Edit 2: this is a multiplexer according to wiki (most reliable source ever loljk)
A definitely comes through when S is high (the S block has power going to do it -> torch attached to S is off) according to your schematic. I really can't tell what's going on in the screenshot with your texture pack, but I can tell you that switches behave differently than simply wiring up a block, so if you're using them you need to include that in the schematic. Normally when people indicate inputs on a schematic the blocks are powered by wires or torches, not switches, and this will give you a different result because the switch in your screenshot is also powering the wire on the block next to the one it's attached to.
So it would work something like this. Create a redstong work bench. just like a normal work bench then in the grid which would be bigger than 3x3 i would think. We could then create are gates.
[] = blank space
so in the redstone work bench we could make this.
[]
this would then create just one block that would do all that logic for us in a smaller place.
Basically a 1x1 block with inputs coming from the N and S while the output comes on the E.
I know the N and S and E things wouldnt be optimal in most cases but it could obviously be made in a different direction. I dont think this will ever happen but it would make this so much simpler. Basically Minecraft IC's
Anyone think this would be awesome.
An example of a use is the “output muxer” in my ALU design, which selects the operation to use. My current design is much bulkier (and slower) than yours.
Imitating greatness: 16-bit Hack ALU design
KEEP CALM AND EAT CAKE
It uses the vertical RS NOR latch from this post. The very rightmost cell (with the ~Q output) can be moved to the asterisk (*) to make it shorter in that direction.
I'm unhappy with how much space the clock lines take up, but it does make it easy to connect a bunch in a line for a shift register. I'd like to find a way to bring in the left side by one more cell.
That's very nifty, I really need to learn the rules for vertical signal propagation. However, I don't think it helps here. You have to run the clock line one cell further out to the left with your design. It also introduces a 1 tick delay on the clock, which is minor but can make synchronizing more of a pain. I do appreciate you looking at it though.
P.S. May I ask what program you used to make that gif?
2x3x5 (can place side-by-side horizontally)
2x3x5 (clock from the side)
1x5x6 (completely vertical)
Does anyone know if it's possible to make wide buses like the one above go around corners in a fixed number of ticks? The obvious way of going around a corner makes the lines toward the outer radius much longer than the inner lines, requiring inverters on some lines but not others. This means I need to add extra delay to the inner lines after the corner (which is undesirable) or find a way to fold it over (like a ribbon cable) in a compact space.
Any ideas?
Edit: Of course, right when I post about it I figure it out.
The upper torches transmit to lines above and the lower torches to lines below, then they're put back together.
Edit 2: I just realized this has the same effect as just sticking inverters on a regular corner unless the bus is more than 15 wide in which case you'd need to invert multiple times, but that's not really solved with this either. :/
Edit 3: Good news, the torches aren't necessary for this at all. Now all of the signals arrive at the same time and travel the same distance, so there's no need for staggered/multiple repeaters.
ah u beat me to it
schematic
Is this image missing some layers? The wires seem to not be connected to anything.
Yes. It's pretty much the same as what paj2323 posted.
I have an AND gate made with both inputs each coming from a single lever; one outside (open/close) and one inside (lock/unlock).
The output is connected to my door, but i run into my problem trying to hide the wiring connected to my door. When i put down blocks to complete the floor just inside the door it cuts off the connection to the output of the AND gate.
So, I was wondering if there is any way to make an AND gate with my same inputs that are working, but instead of the output wired straight to the door, if I could lead the output wire to the block underneath my door and transmit up using another red torch.
I've tried to do this and the door is powered by the torch, but the AND circuit doesn't seem to work the way it should this way.
Also, is it true that you can put glass over/on top of the wiring and it will not break the connection?
Please help me!
Thanks